I was wondering if he'd get a mention here. The idea that we should provide a bad example of an outer join so he can prove his point is bizarre. I've worked with some strange people in the past but I've never come across someone who would argue a point, ask for a counter example and then complain that the counter example wasn't weak enough to buttress his point.

Or admitting you are wrong when you are used to having your statements go unchallenged by subordinates who don’t want to lose their jobs and peers who don’t feel like getting in an argument with someone who won’t listen anyway.